| 3752 recommendations |
Recommendation 12 (Voter Registration) Tanzania 2010
by: EU
In regard to the Zanzibar voters’ registration process, the pre-requisite of holding a Zanzibar Identification Card, attached to a 36 month residency requirement, should be reviewed in light of the difference of treatment between Tanzanian citizens registered on the mainland and Zanzibar. The discretionary powers attributed to local authorities (the shehas) in the proof of residency process should also be reviewed. The voters’ register should be inclusive, residency requirements should be further shortened while special attention should also be dispensed to the registration of youths and university students.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 13 (Voter Registration) Tanzania 2010
by: EU
Political parties should receive periodic and timely information on voter register additions, corrections and deletions, and they should receive copies of the voter register well in advance of elections.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 18 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2004
by: OSCE
To develop public confidence in the “Sailau” electronic voting system, a paper audit trail and recount capacity should be introduced, and the use of the PIN code should be discontinued. There should be independent domestic certification of the e-voting system.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 19 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2004
by: OSCE
Modifications should be made to the system to make it easier to record a vote and to accommodate those with poor eyesight.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 20 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2004
by: OSCE
Use of the Sailau system should be introduced gradually and with more voter education.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 4.1 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2004
by: OSCE
Inclusion of provisions that will permit competent individuals, academic institutions or civil society groups to comprehensively and independently test DRE voting equipment subject to reasonable limitations related only to patent or copyright law. However, such testing should not be perceived as a substitute for the establishment of inclusive and transparent certification procedures.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 4.2 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2004
by: OSCE
Approval of provisions that will ensure against possible conflicts of interests of the vendors.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 4.3 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2004
by: OSCE
As the requirements of HAVA include that DRE systems produce a permanent paper record with a manual audit capacity, serious consideration should also be given to ensuring a voter verified auditable paper trail (VVAPT).
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 4.4 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2004
by: OSCE
Establishment of a clear division of responsibilities between vendors, certification agencies and election administrators, to fully ensure accountability and an effective response in the case of failure of DRE equipment.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 5 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2004
by: OSCE
During the implementation of HAVA, consideration should be given to enhance individual states’ efforts in training poll workers to manage new voting equipment, by releasing additional federal funding for training activities. Such measures have also the potential to further accelerate processing of voters on election day.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 15 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2005
by: OSCE
The e-voting system and equipment should be tested by an independent body which performs tests based on publicly available technical standards and specifications. Any modifications of e-voting system components, in either hardware or software, should be documented, and separately and integrally tested and certified based on publicly available technical standards and specifications.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 16 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2005
by: OSCE
A paper-trail should be instituted in the e-voting system in order to increase public confidence and allow for manual recounts in case of election disputes. The usergenerated four-digit control code should be eliminated.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 17 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2005
by: OSCE
Abstentions (blank votes) should explicitly be counted in the result protocols, instead of being inferred. This strengthens the possible audits that can be done at all levels.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 18 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2005
by: OSCE
The voter interface should be modified in such a way that abstention is subject to the same voter-verification options as selection of a candidate - i.e., a confirmation function should be added.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 19 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2005
by: OSCE
The two-hour periodical connection from polling station computers to CEC during election day for transferring turnout figures should be cancelled, since it enables potential attacks on the integrity of the voting system and serves no essential purpose.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 3 (Electronic Voting) Netherlands 2006
by: OSCE
Though the reasons are clear for the existing variable structure of regulation of the different methods of voting, it would appear to be useful to review and consolidate the legal provisions by amendments to primary legislation, whilst still allowing developing technologies to be regulated by secondary legislation.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 9 (Electronic Voting) Netherlands 2006
by: OSCE
Development of an open source version of RIES, free of proprietary issues and secret components, should be encouraged.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 10 (Electronic Voting) Netherlands 2006
by: OSCE
Electronic voting systems should be monitored by an independent entity distinct from the authorities responsible for conducting elections. Such an entity should have broad technical expertise, and should be also responsible both for formulating and reviewing voting system standards.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 11 (Electronic Voting) Netherlands 2006
by: OSCE
There should be routine testing of voting machines before elections, and randomly selected machines should be subject to testing by an entity other than local election authorities. Mechanisms should be considered to verify that voting machines, as used on election day, are configured with the approved firmware and ballot definition.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 12 (Electronic Voting) Netherlands 2006
by: OSCE
In order to enhance public confidence in DRE voting machines, and to provide for meaningful audits and recounts, legislation regulating use of such systems should include provisions for a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPAT) or an equivalent verification procedure. Software dependent vote recording mechanisms which do not permit an independent check on their operation should be phased out.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 13 (Electronic Voting) Netherlands 2006
by: OSCE
Voting system standards should not permit the use of systems which depend for their security on the secrecy of any part of their technical specifications. Reliance on proprietary systems should be reduced, where neither citizens, nor electoral officials, nor observers can determine how they operate.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 1 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2006
by: OSCE
Further transparency measures, such as access to software codes, independent testing, provision of voter verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) or multiple audit mechanisms would enhance public confidence in the integrity of the new voting technologies.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 22 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2006
by: OSCE
As the responsibility for administering an election is vested with the states’ and counties’ authorities, this should be accounted for in the commercial relationship with vendors. Arrangements should be facilitated by a more clearly defined division of responsibilities, including access to software codes for public testing by professionally competent entities or individuals, under appropriate confidentiality conditions providing both for transparency and adequate protection against possible misuse of the codes.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 23 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2006
by: OSCE
In order to enhance public confidence in DRE voting machines, and to provide for meaningful audits and recounts, legislation regulating use of such systems should include provisions for a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPAT) or an equivalent verification procedure.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 24 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2006
by: OSCE
Clear and advanced guidance of whether the electronic or the paper record controls in a case where they differ will further enhance public confidence in the implementation of DREs.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 25 (Electronic Voting) United States of America 2006
by: OSCE
Implementation of optical scanning equipment will benefit from thorough poll worker training and development of detailed guidelines.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 5 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Legislation and regulations for electronic voting machines should include provisions requiring Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPAT) or an equivalent verification procedure. The legislation should provide for the possibility of a meaningful postelection recounts and audits of results.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 6 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The transparency of the certification process should be enhanced, including access by local authorities, political parties, observers, and relevant civil society groups to certification reports. The tests should cover all aspects of the system. A detailed comprehensive list of required criteria should be developed as the basis for testing.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 7 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The practice that the auditing company is contracted by the vendor raises questions and should be reassessed.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 8 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
In order to maintain public confidence in the e-voting system, more efforts should be made to clearly explain its technical and operational elements, and ensure appropriate safeguards for transparency and accountability. The Ministry of the Interior should play a crucial role in communicating this information to the public, political parties and NGOs.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 9 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The role of the College of Experts should be enhanced. Their mandate should start earlier than 40 days before election day and their members should be available fulltime at least during the election period. In addition, they may need to employ more staff for checking system components and controlling that operational procedures are followed. The inclusion of more external advisers and legal experts in the College should be considered.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 10 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
When controlling the electronic tally, the re-calculation of the tabulation by the College of Experts should be extended to include a recount of magnetic cards at randomly selected polling stations. Finally, the electoral code should foresee that the reports of the College are published.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 11 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The OSCE/ODIHR EAM recommends a comprehensive vulnerability study of the entire system be undertaken by IT security experts.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 12.1 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Ensure that public authorities in charge of the electoral process have adequate supervision and command of the e-voting system, and avoid excessive reliance on the vendors for running the system.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 12.2 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Increase the number of persons entitled to observe the process of making floppies from the master, including, for instance, representatives of political parties.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 12.3 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Reduce the number of people assuming responsibility for handling the floppy discs, ideally, only the Heads of Canton Main Offices and CPSs should handle floppy discs.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 12.4 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Enhance security and integrity of the hardware while stored between elections.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 16 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The involvement of first-time voters in administering elections is commendable, but in order to ensure consistent and efficient implementation of rules regarding opening and closure of voting procedures, consideration should be given to make training mandatory for poll workers ahead of election day.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 17 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The election administration appears to enjoy the trust of the electorate and other stakeholders. Nevertheless, as a matter of best practice and transparency, it is recommended that detailed results of all polling stations (for e-voting) and counting centres (for paper ballots) are publicly disclosed when counting is completed.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 18 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
In order to ensure that procedures are followed and verified accurately, the time for training of poll workers should be extended.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 19.1 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The system could be reviewed to include a separate final confirmation screen where the voter could verify his/her choice of political party and selected candidates.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 19.2 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
The system could be reviewed to introduce a voter verified paper trail, in order to increase transparency.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 20.1 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Consideration should be given to include a hand-over document for ballot boxes after the closing, in order to facilitate accountability of their transfer to the counting centres (Jites).
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 20.2 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Consideration should be given to change closing procedures so that the members of the polling board cannot leave without attending the copying procedure of the ballot boxes' floppy discs and signing the envelopes when they are enclosed.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 20.3 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Consideration should be given to guarantee the presence of at least one assessor during the transfer of the documentation to the counting centre.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 21.1 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Consideration could be given to guarantee a hand over of the floppies from the Polling Station Chairperson to the Head of the Canton Main Office in person.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 21.2 (Electronic Voting) Belgium 2007
by: OSCE
Consideration could be given to ensure that a printout of the initial local results is given to political parties.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 12 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2007
by: OSCE
The law should require re-certification of the entire electronic voting system after changes have been made. All standards and other requirements to which the electronic voting system is certified should be made public.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 13 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2007
by: OSCE
The legislation regulating the electronic voting system should provide for meaningful post-election recounts and audits of results. Legislation should include provisions requiring voter-verified paper audit trails or an equivalent verification procedure.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|
Recommendation 14 (Electronic Voting) Kazakhstan 2007
by: OSCE
To improve transparency, all electronic reports from PECs should be made public, so as to allow parties and observers to verify election results.
Recommendation status: recommended
Open full report
|